Fare game

Sheriff says use-of-force victim is responsible for her own broken nose in Gold Line search

Pasadena’s Carla Sameth ultimately was not charged with either fare evasion or resisting arrest in relation to a violent incident on a Gold Line boarding platform in 2009, but Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department investigators determined that the deputies involved in that same incident had acted “within policy” in detaining and searching Sameth, then ramming her face into a steel post, breaking her nose, chipping a tooth and causing other facial, ear and neck injuries.

In a use-of-force report prepared three weeks after the Dec. 28, 2009 incident, Deputies David Ybarra, Veronica Baeza and Ronald Anderson were exonerated for their roles in the search and subsequent injuries inflicted by Baeza upon Sameth, who was originally detained by Ybarra for allegedly riding on the Gold Line without a ticket.

Sameth, who according to the report showed a receipt to Ybarra for a $5 day pass, which was lost in her purse, was released from LA County USC-Medical Center after receiving treatment for her injuries more than eight hours following the incident.

“The non-compliant actions of the suspect led to her becoming off-balance and striking her nose upon the support pole. Although a significant injury, the nose injury could have been prevented had the suspect not resisted the simple pat-down search being conducted by the deputy. The deputy was acting within the scope of the law and department guidelines while conducting the search,” the sheriff’s report concludes.

In the estimation of the sheriff’s Risk Management Bureau Coordinator Captain Shaun Mathers, “This incident was thoroughly investigated by representatives from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Transit Service Bureau North,” states the document signed by Mathers on April 12. “The investigation concluded that the actions taken by the three deputies were reasonable, justified and in compliance with department policy. Consequently, no corrective action measures are recommended or contemplated.”

In late June, Sameth, a Pasadena businesswoman and single mother of two teenagers, ended her federal civil rights lawsuit against the county and the Sheriff’s Department for an out-of-court settlement of $199,000. She insists she only lost her balance after Baeza forced her face into the pole. Sameth’s harrowing first-person account of her ordeal, titled “One day on the Gold Line,” ran in the Aug. 30 issue of the Weekly and can be read online at pasadenaweekly.com.

In a June 20 report to Sachi Hamai, executive officer of the Board of Supervisors, Senior Assistant County Counsel Patrick Wu wrote that the county would agree to pay Sameth the money. In the document to the board, county officials calculated that $47,125 in attorney fees and another $21,789 in other costs associated with the case had already been paid.

“Quite honestly, it reminds me of what batterers say about those they abuse,” Sameth said about the sheriff’s conclusions. “I worked for the Seattle City Attorney’s Office and prepared many domestic violence cases. The explanations and excuses were very similar about how the victims injured themselves and it was all their fault — blaming the victim.”

Laura Inlow, the Torrance-based attorney representing the Sheriff’s Department, said she was asked to allow the department to speak to the media about the case. Sheriff’s spokesman Steve Whitmore was unfamiliar with the case, but said the situation involving Sameth and the deputies sounded regrettable. But Whitmore also said ideas for potential reform of the current system are welcome.

“Reforms are always something the sheriff is looking at,” Whitmore said. “Regardless of where the idea comes from, if the suggestion has merit, the sheriff will look at it.”

Sameth’s attorney, John Burton of Pasadena, said the deputies overreacted and had no business searching Sameth over a fare evasion claim. Unless deputies had a reasonable suspicion that Sameth was armed, which she was not, the search constituted a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantees against unreasonable searches.

“It’s like these deputies just have a mindset that you can’t put up with any resistance, any talk back. The pattern here, it is the kind of minor friction that occurs between human beings all the time in a complex society. … But because they are deputies, they retaliate with law enforcement powers,” said Burton, observing that cases of police responding to minor incidents — especially those involving women — with overwhelming and sometimes deadly force seem to be on the rise.

Burton cited as an example the LAPD, which is now under fire over the July 22 in-custody death of one woman, 35-year-old Alesia Thomas, and the extreme injuries inflicted last month upon 34-year-old registered nurse Michelle Jordan of Sunland by officers. Jordan was pulled out of her car, handcuffed, then knocked down from behind and dragged across a parking lot for allegedly resisting arrest over an alleged cell phone violation.

In Thomas’ case, officers tried to arrest the South Los Angeles resident after she dropped off her two children, ages 3 and 12, at the LAPD’s Southeast Station. She reportedly told police she was a drug addict and could no longer take care of the kids, according to the LA Times. When she allegedly resisted arrest, the Times reported, officers bound her ankles and hands in what is called a “hobble restraint device” before another officer kicked her in the genitals and verbally abused her. When Thomas was finally in the backseat, she died.

The incident involving Jordan, in which police officials claim the woman defied orders to stay in her car and began challenging them, was caught on a camera owned by a business in the Tujunga mall where she had parked after being pulled over, according to the Times. The officers then arrested her, slamming her body to the ground. After she was handcuffed, the video shows Jordan being led to the back of the police cruiser, where she was slammed to the ground a second time.

LAPD Chief Charlie Beck has ordered investigations into both incidents and assigned all of the officers involved to desk duty during that process.

The Sheriff’s Department is currently under investigation by the US Justice Department and is presently the target of a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Southern California. Both agencies are investigating claims that deputies regularly beat and torture inmates inside county jails.

Burton said the incident involving Sameth was taken to extremes by the three deputies, all of whom, he said, had been trained in a culture of violence in county jails, where new deputies spend three to five years before going on patrol.

“All [Ybarra] had to do was write a ticket and say, ‘See you in court,’” Burton said.

In deposition testimony provided by a top Sheriff’s Department official in relation to Sameth’s lawsuit, the 32-year veteran and detective sergeant supervising the sheriff’s Transit Services Bureau was, at times, intentionally vague about exactly what he knew about the incident and who was in charge of the initial investigation of Sameth’s injuries.

In that testimony, Detective Sgt. Ronald Marquez described a surreal series of events. Although he was the first ranking officer on the scene (called there by radio dispatch due to the absence of supervising Sgt. Mike Burse) and the first person to separately interview each of the deputies involved, Marquez did not record or write down any portions of those conversations. He also could not recall any portion of what was said.

Under questioning by Burton, Marquez revealed he was through with his videotaping of Sameth — all while Sameth, handcuffed to a gurney inside an ambulance, said Baeza stood within earshot of the conversation — by the time Burse finally arrived at the scene.

Sameth said she never saw Burse throughout the course of the incident. When the supervising sergeant finally showed up, Marquez said he and Burse exchanged very few words, perhaps as much as saying “hi,” and did not talk about the incident before Marquez left for his office at Gateway Plaza in downtown LA. Marquez said he simply handed the videotape to Burse — who ostensibly used it later to write the exonerating use-of-force report — and left the scene.

In his testimony, Marquez told Burton he did not know why Sameth was in custody or what types of injuries she had suffered, but he said he asked that he be allowed to interview Sameth about her injuries while she was being treated by paramedics. Like the three deputies, Marquez didn’t recall reading Sameth her rights and couldn’t cite specific department policies regarding the proper handling of such incidents.

Marquez also didn’t record on his video camera the city paramedic telling him it was OK to interview Sameth while she was being treated. Marquez did, however, make one thing abundantly clear: “I was not investigating a use of force. I was merely conducting a taped interview of this person. I was not investigating this incident,” he said.

When pressed for what he’d learned from interviewing Baeza, Anderson and Ybarra before interviewing and videotaping Sameth, Marquez could only remember that the deputies “were not injured” in the altercation.

“Though I’m glad I didn’t have to go to trial, it wasn’t enough,” Sameth wrote in her story published in the Weekly. “There is not a week that goes by without another article or story about violence committed by the LA County Sheriff’s Department. The deputy who broke my nose, the deputy who took me off the Metro, the ‘supervisor’ who interrogated me in front of my assailant — no one — has ever admitted wrongdoing or apologized. I am not aware of any reprimands or training ordered as a result of the incident,” she wrote. “Looking at what happened to me and at what happens inside the jails, I have to ask, how many more stories like mine are out there?”

Having learned that the deputies involved in her beating were exonerated, Sameth said she worries about the likelihood of other incidents occurring in the future.

“It is so completely outrageous,” she said. “It makes me feel sick to my stomach. And it makes me very afraid of what they are capable of … Not a good lesson for my kids, in terms of ethics, truth and honesty, taking responsibility.”

The incident and its outcome illustrate “an acceptable culture of violence and complete lack of accountability within the LA County’s Sheriff’s Department,” Sameth added.

“It seems there is such a strong culture of abuse and cover-up, blaming the victim, justifying force. The message was so clear to me that day and night that I was powerless and did not have rights, and asserting myself in any way or asking questions would only cause more problems for me. There is really nothing in my life that would have adequately prepared me for that experience, and I can say unequivocally that it was not my fault and that there were a multitude of wrong actions on the part of the Sheriff’s department that day and night.”

“My read on this is they are putting these deputies in (charge of) jails and inculcating them with a certain attitude and then letting them out on the street where they are doing the same thing” to average citizens as they do to inmates, said Burton. “This is really sick, this is really pathological, and the result of all this will cause major problems.”

Related Articles

Comments

As I read this story and Carla's personal account last week, and look at the photos of my sister sitting there handcuffed and broken, I'm sickened and saddened all over again. I spent the days right after this horrific experience with her, and having seen her bruised and battered face up close, I still can't look at these photos without tears in my eyes, being reminded of the sense of outrage and heartbreak that I felt then. I'm so proud of my sister for going public with her traumatic story, and grateful to the PW for publishing it.

posted by jsfishman on 9/06/12 @ 04:20 p.m.

Well, your first problem is letting gangbangers investigate themselves for committing gangbanger crimes. You see, unless there is an already-brewing internecine conflict happening, cops will usually determine that the average LE-battered citizen has only him/herself to blame for any injuries suffered during any periodically violent program of cop-wilding.

But you want to know one way to cut down on the deadly-force problem so regularly practiced by the adrenaline addicts of Code Enforcement? Simple, institute a "Zero-Tolerance" policy regarding ANY time the gangbangers of law-enforcement are determined to have criminally used excessive force. You do this by making the badge-dangling cowards of that institution pay up to 50% of their salary for at least five years to both help the taxpayer mitigate the cost of their violent criminal conduct and also compensate the ever-more-populous victims of criminal police violence. Of course, if it wants to, the representing police union may also be allowed to pay off a lion's share of any award adjudicated against any of its members.

But no more letting the taxpayer pick up the entire tab.

Oh yeah, and an independent civilian panel would also determine whenever an LE is guilty, with LE management playing only a subordinate advisory role.

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/06/12 @ 09:48 p.m.

Bravo to the Pasadena Weekly for publishing this story. I was dumbfounded after reading these two articles recounting Carla's horrific experience with the County Sheriff's fare collection techniques on the Gold Line.

The question that comes to mind is why are armed Sheriffs doing fare collection? Why don't they have fare enforcers like municipal meter enforcers? It is like having a swat team writing parking tickets.

The reason seems to be money. Since the disbandment of the MTA's police force, the County Sheriff has assumed all policing of Metro Lines with the MTA and County of LA residents picking up the hefty tab.

In the 1990's, the MTA had its own police and security force. It was the 9th largest in the state. The MTA Board had been reconfigured to include the Mayor of LA and appointees, the Board of Supervisors, and regional representatives. MTA had just gotten an infusion of cash by a recently approved public initiative. Both the County and City were strapped for cash and Mayor Riodan had promised to beef up the city's police force. So, in a deal brokered by the the Mayor, the MTA voted to:

Disband the MTA (formerly SCRTD) police force

Incorporate those officers into the LAPD

Pay both the City and County (and eventually, County only) for policing the MTA's properties and rail lines at a much higher rate than what the MTA police force was costing.

I doubt that the former MTA Police Department would have acted in such a heavy handed manner in that their focus was on the welfare of the riding public.

Any Metro rider, after reading about Carla's experience should be concerned as to what the Sheriff's department could do to them. Particularly, since there was no mention on the Sheriff's part as to plans or training so that something like this won't happen again.

Again, kudos to the Pasadena Weekly.

posted by Pasadena-Dave on 9/06/12 @ 10:02 p.m.

Last week's story haunted me all week. Thanks Kevin for this follow-up. There is so much more that needs to be said ...

posted by Ellen on 9/07/12 @ 09:36 a.m.

I agree with comment above. Story haunted me/bugged me/infuriated me all week. I felt Kevin's story was necessary as I was looking for a commentary this week. Bravo Pasadena Weekly for taking this on.

posted by Kay on 9/07/12 @ 09:41 a.m.

I am shocked, saddened, but ultimately not surprised that this horrific event happened. The sheriffs have a culture of violence and terror. My own 15 year old daughter was stopped by 5 sheriffs on her way off the metro and asked to produce her ticket. Don't these guys have better things to do? Like making sure my 15 year old isn't harassed on the metro?!? Do you want people to buy metro tickets? Then do what almost every other civilized city does -- set up ticket barriers that don't let you through until you put your ticket or pass thru the machine.

posted by concernedmom on 9/07/12 @ 10:47 a.m.

You know, if this woman had not "lost" her ticket, and had presented one to the officer, there would have been no "incident" and no sensational story in the WEEKLY. Oh, my! We couldn't have something like THAT, could we? No sensational stories? No lawyers being hired? No lawsuits being filed? How boring. Better to shirk responsibility and cry, "I'm a victim! Do something! Reward me with $199,000 for breaking fare-evasion laws."

All this illustrates is the upside-down, Alice-In-Wonderland, bleeding-heart-liberal world in which we, unfortunately, are now forced to live in.

posted by Miles Post on 9/08/12 @ 05:24 p.m.

@ Miles Post. I really hope that I am misreading your post, and can't quite believe I'm getting it right. Ms. Sameth HAD her ticket and later produced it (see the prior story/posts). You may be more organized than many of us, but some people need a little time to find a ticket in a purse. Regardless, that misses the point. NO ONE, of any race or religion, gender or orientation, or of any age, or personality, deserves to be treated with violence and to have broken bones for any reason. I can't believe anyone thinks otherwise.

posted by bringmefish64 on 9/08/12 @ 06:41 p.m.

"Miles-Post" is just (at least spiritually) one of those adrenalin addicted, bust'em-in-the-teeth and break-their-bones brand of L.A. County jackboot. You know, the brand of coward all L.E. gangbangers hopes gets put on their review panel that determines whether they've committed some jailable crime of violence against the functionally innocent ... to badge-danglers like MP, it's ALWAYS the victim's fault!

Meanwhile, MP goes back to tossing off at his Alice-in-Wonderland porn videos.

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/09/12 @ 09:07 a.m.

--- bringmefish64 comments in quotations ---

"Ms. Sameth HAD her ticket and later produced it (see the prior story/posts)."

From the article:

Sameth, who according to the report showed a RECEIPT to Ybarra for a $5 day pass . . . (emphasis added)

From what I gathered, she did not produce a TICKET. She produced a RECEIPT for a ticket, which IS NOT a ticket and has no monetary value. For all the officers knew, she may have found the receipt in the ticket vending machine bin (or anywhere) -- or -- she could have sold her ticket to someone else and just kept the valueless receipt.

And you would be ubber-naive to think that these types of stunts don't happen.

"You may be more organized than many of us, but some people need a little time to find a ticket in a purse."

"Regardless, that misses the point. NO ONE, of any race or religion, gender or orientation, or of any age, or personality, deserves to be treated with violence and to have broken bones for any reason. I can't believe anyone thinks otherwise."

Well, think again. I get soooooo tired of seeing people in public who shirk their responsibilities and then cop an attitude with police officers. There is such a large portion of out society that have absolutely NO respect for ANY form of authority. If they don't respect the police, do you expect them to respect anyone else?

I guess this woman will just have to look elsewhere for sympathy. She won't get it from me. Too bad if that spoils her day and puts a sad face on her service animal.

posted by Miles Post on 9/09/12 @ 09:41 a.m.

--- comments by DanD in quotation marks ---

"Miles-Post" is just (at least spiritually) one of those adrenalin addicted, bust'em-in-the-teeth and break-their-bones brand of L.A. County jackboot. You know, the brand of coward all L.E. gangbangers hopes gets put on their review panel that determines whether they've committed some jailable crime of violence against the functionally innocent ... to badge-danglers like MP, it's ALWAYS the victim's fault!"

Thank you, Doctor DanD, for that instant pshcho-analysis. Where did you earn your Doctorate degree? Some mail-order outfit perhaps?

Too bad it's flawed.

Do you suppose it could be that there are some of us who consider other factors in a story such as this instead of just swallowing everything the author is dishing out, hook, line and sinker? The woman did not produce a valid ticket. Plain and simple. That is most certainly an integral detail of this story, and one that was poo-poohed and downplayed by the author.

"Meanwhile, MP goes back to tossing off at his Alice-in-Wonderland porn videos."

I counted the guy pummeling the female police officer with at least seven brutal punches to her face. Lucky for you the zone where his fist was coming in contact with her face was off camera. She had to have extensive facial reconstruction surgery afterwards.

And the guy's daughter was there to watch it all. Let's give this guy the "Father of the Year" award.

And I'll bet you a dollar he rides light-rail trains without a proper ticket.

For every person crying and snivveling to the media because the police gave them a hard time because they were breaking the law by riding a light-rail train without a proper ticket, I can show you MORE examples of police being buried at cemetaries because they were shot and KILLED during what they thought would be a routine traffic stop.

Why is your cause for concern and sympathy so one-sided?

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 03:01 a.m.

MP;

In that I have no sister, it seems that you're just suffering from a bit of transferral about your own siblings with your slipped Fruedian admission that you do enjoy pleasuring yourself while viewing child porn.

Meanwhile, the video you offer (even with your ad-hominem commentary) is a singular event, the video I posted encompasses an institutional malady. So what are you saying? Because one female cop got the crap beat out of her, all cops have the default option of viciously mauling all non-combative civilian suspects? Mouthing back at smart-ass code-enforcers IS NOT illegal, nor is it casual permission for some jackboot to go all gangbanger. That's why we have a Bill of Rights, to protect us ALL from vicious, violent code-enforcers. Do you believe in the Contitution?

Beating down a cop just doing his/her job is not right, but a cop violently molesting ANY SUSPECT (as illustrated in the prevailing article) simply because they have the default power to do so is phuckin' evil.

Anyway, you need to start taking your meds again, boy, because anybody being accused of violating the law by a cop does not mean it's necessarily so, because EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty. AS it is, one lesson that I have learned about Pasadena's police-state force, they are one self-perjuring bunch of MFers.

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/10/12 @ 10:29 a.m.

MY RESPONSE PART TWO

"Mouthing back at smart-ass code-enforcers IS NOT illegal, nor is it casual permission for some jackboot to go all gangbanger."

When you're in the midst of breaking the law, as Ms. Sameth was doing when she could not produce a valid ticket, you MIGHT want to extend some courtesy to the officers since, at that point in time, they have every right to arrest you. If she had been courteous to them, they would have given her a citation and that would have been the full extent of their encounter. Then, when she had her day in court, she could explain to the judge as to why she was so irresponsible and couldn't manage to hang on to a valid ticket for a ninety-minute light-rail train ride. Even kindergartners can manage to not lose a ticket for that duration of time.

Old-fashioned basic manners, common courtesy and social graces still go a long way in this society. Someone needs to explain that to both you AND Ms. Sameth.

"That's why we have a Bill of Rights, to protect us ALL from vicious, violent code-enforcers. Do you believe in the Contitution?"

No. But I DO believe in the Constitution.

Our Founding Fathers also expected us citizens to be RESPONSIBLE citizens. This would include things like purchasing AND NOT LOSING a valid ticket while riding a light-rail train. It's also known as obeying the law.

"Beating down a cop just doing his/her job is not right, but a cop violently molesting ANY SUSPECT (as illustrated in the prevailing article) simply because they have the default power to do so is phuckin' evil."

I have a simple mantra that has served me very well over the years. (1.) I obey the law. (2.) If a police officer detains me and questions me about something, I am courteous to him/her. (3.) Number (2.) rarely happens because I practice number (1.)

You should try it. So should Ms. Sameth.

"Anyway, you need to start taking your meds again, boy, because anybody being accused of violating the law by a cop does not mean it's necessarily so, because EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty. AS it is, one lesson that I have learned about Pasadena's police-state force, they are one self-perjuring bunch of MFers."

It's obvious you hate the police. Like I said, try walking a mile in their shoes for, say, six months, and you'll have a complete 180 degree turn on your view of the world.

Poetic justice would be me serving on the same jury as you, and I would vote exactly the opposite of how you would vote on a jury verdict!

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 01:41 p.m.

MY RESPONSE PART ONE

--- comments by DanD in quotation marks ---

"In that I have no sister,"

Well, contrary to your rush to judgement, I've never viewed any "Alice in Wonderland" child porn video. My friend, however, did, and he now says that, after a second viewing, he's come to the conclusion that it was your mother who starred in it.

"it seems that you're just suffering from a bit of transferral about your own siblings with your slipped Fruedian admission that you do enjoy pleasuring yourself while viewing child porn."

Whoo boy. Here we go again with more of that instant psycho-analysis of someone you've never met and have only chatted with via the Internet. You realize, of course, that none of this can be considered legitimate unless and until I can lie down on a couch, with you sitting nearby with a notepad, while the two of us engage in a Rorschach test.

I've never viewed child porn as you allege, but I suppose in these mamby-pamby, bleeding heart liberal times in which we now live, I could easily do so with the approval of many libertarian ultra-liberals. After all, it's MY business what I do in privacy of my own home, right? If the police came and arrested me and perhaps roughed me up a little when I got mouthy with them, I could always go running to the liberal news media, such as the PASADENA WEEKLY and have a big, sensational article published about my mistreatment. And I would most certainly get a large, sympathetic audience. Hopefully I could even sue everybody and walk away with $199,000.

Isn't Ultra-Liberal Land (a.k.a. Southern California)wonderful?

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 01:47 p.m.

MY RESPONSE PART ONE & ONE HALF

"Meanwhile, the video you offer (even with your ad-hominem commentary) is a singular event, the video I posted encompasses an institutional malady. So what are you saying? Because one female cop got the crap beat out of her, all cops have the default option of viciously mauling all non-combative civilian suspects?"

So it's accepted that you have absolutey no sympathy toward the female officer who was attempting to do her job.

Yeah, I figured.

Here's what I'm saying: It's an ugly world out there and there's a lot more cops getting KILLED in the line of duty than there are people getting ROUGHED UP on the Gold Line. Carla Sameth brought this problem(s) upon herself. I repeat: If the woman had produced a valid ticket instead of a value-less receipt, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Carla Sameth caused this problem by not having a valid ticket in her possession. She was breaking the law. Maybe it's time for her to accept some responsibility for this incident and hold herself accountable. Oh! But wait! This is 2012. No one accepts responsibility and holds themselves accountable for anything anymore. Not when they can blame it on everyone else and walk away pocketing a cool $199,000. And, as an extra added bonus, they can get lots of free publicity and media attention thrown in as part of the package deal. What a country! Who says crime doesn't pay? Carla Sameth has clearly shown us it does!

It would be interesting if you could escort some of these fare-enforcement officers on their rounds for, say, six months. I guarantee you, buddy, that you would have a whole different perspective of what they deal with on a daily basis.

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 01:48 p.m.

AND STILL, you presume that -- contrary to the Constitution -- Ms. Sameth is guilty of violating the law even though there never was any conviction stating as much! Only fascist states mandate that all non-incorporated capitalist-slaves (i.e. the general population) shall perpetually be presumed guilty of any crime a code-enforcer chooses to charge until proven innocent ... proof that, ultimately, may only be bought from corrupt officials. Presumptive guilt is a primary casus belli of criminal police brutality.

Tell me, what "crime" was Sameth ever found guilty of? That she was not in immediate possession of a ticket? Have you EVER bought a ticket -- or a day (or longer) pass -- at one of Los Angeles County's train stations? ANYBODY could buy a ticket, lose it (or get it stolen), be cited for failure to produce it, AND STILL not be guilty of failing to pay fare because every transaction accomplished at these train stations is electronically recorded! She was never found guilty because proof in fact does exist within the system itself that she (beyond all reasonable doubt) did in fact pay her fare. At every ticket booth along that line, EVERY BUYER OF A PASS has his/her picture taken with the time and date of when that (variably extended) permission to ride is issued! Her having that receipt was prima-facie evidence that she was indeed legal! Instead, these POS jackboots chose to get their version of "stick-time" in simply because the woman was not sufficiently -- to their determination -- organized.

That officer had nothing more than a summary suspicion that this person may have attempted evading proper fare payment though no definitive proof of guilt ever existed! But they smacked her around anyway simply because they could. Ultimately, the charges were dropped. Are you suggesting that the Sheriff's Dept. has officially chosen to lie about her guilt or otherwise not enforce the law?

But you MP are not really concerned with the facts because you are what's called (in WWW.speak) a troll. You are in fact (whether bought-and-paid-for or "independent")a law-enforcement troll. You are plainly stating that guilt or innocence is irrelevant to whether or not law-enforcement agencies are responsible for their own crimes of violence against any community they are (supposedly) sworn to protect. ANYBODY (even of the troll-world) reading this thread plainly sees this. Beyond all the juvenile libel we have traded, this last display of truth is the ultimate fact that you will never be able to refute, so please do keep insulting everybody else's intelligence. It just confirms that you are just another loser of law enforcement (that all good law-enforcers really do need to get rid of).

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/10/12 @ 04:41 p.m.

PART ONEWow. In the course of just a couple of days, you've transitioned from being a clinical phychiatrist, performing, from a remote site, several instant diagnoses of my mental state, to, now, being an attorney who specializes in Constitutional law. What's the name of the "degree mill" that churns out all your certificates of achievement?

What are you going to be tomorrow? A butcher, a baker or a candlestick-maker?

"You presume that -- contrary to the Constitution -- Ms. Sameth is guilty of violating the law even though there never was any conviction stating as much!"

There are laws on the books that stipulate that she was supposed to be in possession of a valid ticket. It's called the "Proof of Payment" system, a system first introduced by one of those fascist countries in Europe. The vast majority of the other passengers on the light rail train were responsible citizens, did not lose their tickets, and were able to present them to the officers upon request. Ms. Sabeth did not meet that threshold of responsibility. The other passengers did.

Let that soak in. I'll wait.

From the information I've gathered, the officers attempted to give her a citation or otherwise known as a "Notice to Appear." Signing the document is not an admission of guilt. It is a promise that the person will appear in court on the day stipulated, where s/he can argue their case before a judge.

"Only fascist states mandate that all non-incorporated capitalist-slaves (i.e. the general population) shall perpetually be presumed guilty of any crime a code-enforcer chooses to charge until proven innocent ... proof that, ultimately, may only be bought from corrupt officials. Presumptive guilt is a primary casus belli of criminal police brutality."

If Ms. Sabeth had produced a valid ticket, LIKE THE OTHER PASSENGERS DID, the situation would not have escalated to the level it did. By not having a valid ticket, she was in violation of certain sections of the Penal Code, whereupon she could have later argued her guilt or innocense in front of a judge. HAD SHE COOPERATED.

Let that soak in. I'll wait.

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 07:15 p.m.

PART TWO

"Tell me, what "crime" was Sameth ever found guilty of?"

The officers had "probable cause" to believe that she may have been in violation of several statutes of the Penal Code because she could not produce a valid ticket, LIKE THE OTHER PASSENGERS DID.

I would imagine the officers were intending to have her sign a "Notice to Appear" where no presumption of guilt is made, and she could argue her case in front of a judge. But it never got that far. She was not cooperative.

"That she was not in immediate possession of a ticket? Have you EVER bought a ticket -- or a day (or longer) pass -- at one of Los Angeles County's train stations? ANYBODY could buy a ticket, lose it (or get it stolen), be cited for failure to produce it, AND STILL not be guilty of failing to pay fare because every transaction accomplished at these train stations is electronically recorded! She was never found guilty because proof in fact does exist within the system itself that she (beyond all reasonable doubt) did in fact pay her fare. At every ticket booth along that line, EVERY BUYER OF A PASS has his/her picture taken with the time and date of when that (variably extended) permission to ride is issued! Her having that receipt was prima-facie evidence that she was indeed legal! Instead, these POS jackboots chose to get their version of "stick-time" in simply because the woman was not sufficiently -- to their determination -- organized."

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 07:24 p.m.

PART THREE

Wow. You claim to know an awful lot about how Metro operates their light-rail system. What's going to happen to your argument if a surveillance videotape shows up that shows her picking up someone else's discarded ticket receipt off the station platform and attempting to use it as a valid ticket? WHICH IT ISN'T.

As you've so eloquently expressed in your missive shown above, our society is "dumming down" and "Idiocracy", as depicted in the Mike Judge film of the same name, is just around the corner. Perhaps its asking way too much of our citizens to endure the extreme hassle of having to buy a valid ticket for a public transit vehicle and then actually expect them to RETAIN those tickets on their person for the full duration of their journey. Like in the movie, I guess we're just becoming a bunch of irresponsible nerds with pre-kindergarten mentality and society should start treating us as such.

It's obviously waaaaay too complicated for a lot of people to buy a train ticket and not lose it, as Ms. Sabeth has so clearly illustrated.

Let's just make all public transit free of charge so we won't have any more ugly, unfortuante scenes like what happened to Ms. Sabeth. There will be no more hurt feelings and it will be just one more way that the ever-so-important "Nanny State" can take care of us from cradle to grave. Free transit -- along with your free fluoridated water! Let's hear it for the Nanny State! SOMEONE has to take care of us because we sure as hell can't take care of ourselves. And, just like issuing drivers licenses to uninsured illegal aliens, ** remember -- we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings** it's sooo CALIFORNIAN!! Remember, too, that Metro will soon be extending one of their light-rail lines to "Ground Zero" of all this liberal, tolerant thinking -- the People's Republic of Santa Monica!

Go Metro! And thanks for the free ride! Being dumb and irresponsible has its advantages!

posted by Miles Post on 9/10/12 @ 07:26 p.m.

"Let's just make all public transit free of charge so we won't have any more ugly, unfortuante scenes like what happened to Ms. Sabeth. There will be no more hurt feelings and it will be just one more way that the ever-so-important "Nanny State" can take care of us from cradle to grave. Free transit -- along with your free fluoridated water! Let's hear it for the Nanny State! SOMEONE has to take care of us because we sure as hell can't take care of ourselves. And, just like issuing drivers licenses to uninsured illegal aliens, ** remember -- we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings** it's sooo CALIFORNIAN!! Remember, too, that Metro will soon be extending one of their light-rail lines to "Ground Zero" of all this liberal, tolerant thinking -- the People's Republic of Santa Monica!

Go Metro! And thanks for the free ride! Being dumb and irresponsible has its advantages!"

MP;

Are you having an emotional meltdown? What does ANY of the above have to do with the article at hand? It is quite apparent that you need some professional help ... I hope you get some.

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/10/12 @ 10:04 p.m.

"Are you having an emotional meltdown? What does ANY of the above have to do with the article at hand?"

Go back and re-read what I wrote. I said that, since our general population is getting supider and stupider, the idea of them being able to purchase a valid and correct ticket for a public transportation conveyance, and being able to possess it for the full duration of their journey, is becoming an unrealistic concept. Ms. Sabeth is "Exhibit A".

My "solution", a tongue-in-cheek and sarcastic one at that, would be to allow everyone to just ride for free. End of problem. It's just a matter of making the world "simplistic" enough for these morons and certain problems and dilemmas will go away.

"It is quite apparent that you need some professional help ... I hope you get some."

There you go again with some more of that "instant analysis". When will it ever end?

The only professional help I need is someone to come to my house and help me in re-modeling my kitchen. And I try to make a point of flying Delta Air Lines. They're "the airline run by professionals."

posted by Miles Post on 9/11/12 @ 12:22 p.m.

So then, you are just a troll.

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/12/12 @ 07:03 p.m.

If it will go toward ending this inane exchange, go ahead and believe what you want. I, in turn, will do the same.

posted by Miles Post on 9/13/12 @ 07:42 p.m.

Troll-on!

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/14/12 @ 11:19 a.m.

If I'm a troll, then, like most trolls, it's time for me to collect the toll from you to pass through this area.

Cash not accepted.

Time for you to get on your knees and open your mouth. I'm sure you're really skilled at this!

posted by Miles Post on 9/14/12 @ 02:59 p.m.

So now you spontaneously confess to being a sex-pervert troll? How "Rocky-Horror" fascist of you! You really do sound just like an S&M SD. Anyway, I certainly hope you don't hang out around children.

DanD

posted by DanD on 9/14/12 @ 09:51 p.m.

"You really do sound just like an S&M SD."

Huh? What does "S&M" stand for? What does "SD" stand for? I'm not quite as cut in as you are on the terminology of all this stuff. You'll have to explain it to me.

So i am dealing with this issue after being arrested imprisioned.and.kidmapped.by sheriff deputy after.refusing to show tap.card while sitting on a.bench. Listen the sheriff.can ASK to see your tap.card.but they can.not make you. You have legal protection where police can not compel you to say anything or show anything that can incriminate you in a crime. The sheriff and mta have chosen to engage im criminal behavior to extprt 100s millions of dollars off.the people of this county that is why they do not want locking turnstiles that will hurt their profits they make on this shakedown. Exercise.your rights and tell.them.no when they demand to see your tap card ...all they can legally do is ask you to leave.the property if.they do anything more than that without probable cause you.can sue and.prosecute them. They have.been robbing us with this.program.and.anyone that doesnt go along with it is attacked.by these thugs. I am going to launch a billion dollar federal class.action and.make.them pay back all the money they have stolen and file.federal.racketering charges to put their executives in prison for engaging in unconstitutional and illegal practices to enrich themselves and use our own public servants.to rob us.